Introduction
No matter what industry you are a part of the rise and hype of Artificial Intelligence (AI) has been the centerpiece of discussions across all industries for the better part of the last two years. For us as legal professionals, technological breakthroughs have raised many critical questions:
- What does the future hold for lawyers?
- How can we best utilise these tools for our work?
- Which part of our work has to change to adapt with the changing times?
But there's another, perhaps even more important question that we have been asking ourselves:
- How will AI impact the next generation of lawyers?
While it is tempting to make assumptions about how younger generations in higher education are using these new tools – assumptions pale in comparison to actual data. Through the summer internship program at Elias Neocleous & Co LLC, which hosted over 20 individuals, we had the opportunity to gather the thoughts, opinions and experiences of our young interns into how they are engaging with AI in their education. This has provided a window into how AI might shape the future of legal practice.
To ensure candid feedback, all our interns were asked to submit their responses anonymously.
Our thoughts
Given the widespread adoption of ChatGPT and other AI tools globally, we expected the 'first wave' of reaction from universities – which was in the form of banning AI tools to be replaced with a more proactive approach. However, we found that many universities remain hesitant, with formal integration still lacking (though some professors encourage its use informally).
Not integrating as early as possible what appears to be an inevitable technology, contradicts the principles of continuous improvement that higher education institutions have long upheld. Naturally, there are concerns regarding the submitted work of students, which is expected to be their own and not AI-generated; and yet – discouraging such tools is nothing more than a band-aid solution. Focusing instead on integrating AI tools on the day-to-day learning journey of the students could produce the desired results – properly introducing them and integrating them as part of the available courses, helping law students to learn how to supercharge their knowledge and skills with complementary technologies that allow them to do more, more effectively, in less time while simultaneously preparing them to face similar conditions in their working environment. Law firms are increasingly using AI tools – with some such as Elias Neocleous & Co LLC even introducing their own personalized internal tools such as Neolaw.ai – and Law graduates who can effectively leverage AI will stand out in a competitive field.
Still, we cannot ignore another key component – one essential in the making of lawyers, which is the ability to cultivate critical thinking. Graduating from a law school is considered to be in the top 10 hardest degrees in the world – alongside Aerospace Engineering and Physics. The level of compensation of lawyers has been excused due to the knowledge they bring to the table, the amount of hours they are able to work and their ability to find innovative solutions to problems – skills which are first and foremost cultivated at University. Through the assignments that required us to read through thousands of pages of legal text, the group works that forced us to learn how to debate effectively and settle amicably, and the long hours of trying to find a solution to a problem from a small thread – all were components in the making of lawyers across the world. The overreliance which our summer interns experienced with AI tools is concerning in that regard – finding the easy way out of problems which normally have no easy way out. It was always through that painful process of learning through trial and error that the skills we are honing today were growing back then – the ability to multitask, to focus deeply and to keep trying to find an answer to seemingly unsolvable problems and develop an innate sense of self confidence through consistently proving to yourself that you can do so.
We cannot overlook the benefits of such technologies in the learning process– even if students tend to over-rely on them. Access to immediate feedback offers the potential for rapid improvement, whether in language skills or the quality of your arguments. Menial tasks are minimised, creating room for deeper learning. Instead of spending 10 hours searching through books for the correct passage, a digital search might just take 5 minutes of digital search, yielding a more efficient outcome – an answer, with extra time and energy to spare. Our summer placements clearly demonstrated this impact: the quality of their work improved both directly and indirectly. Directly through the immediate transposition of their work, and indirectly, by helping them plan better and focus on improving rather than doing the work for them – much like having your very own 24/7 tutor at hand to support their learning journey at every step.
Balancing AI and traditional learning
But when the answers and solutions are available at the fingertips of law students, when do the skills come in? And if a lawyer can find the answer to a question through such tools, why can't someone else? What then truly makes someone a lawyer after all? Unfortunately, we don't have clear answers to these questions, but we do have concerns about potential learning gaps in the next generation of legal professionals. The educational considerations are hard to overlook, as mechanization of tasks and lack of critical questioning truly are key components of the profession.
Yet are we simply clinging to outdated methods, insisting that 'this is how things were always done around here'? Do the lawyers of tomorrow really need to work long hours, multitask, and struggle to find answers for their clients, burning the midnight oil to meet their deadlines? Or do they simply have to become ethical prompt engineers – the most trusted to resolve disputes in an increasingly automated world?
We have to consider the changing standards. Maybe the skills we value today in our profession will simply be old news tomorrow. The democratization of legal knowledge, the changing tides in the nature of work and the global movement towards automation leading to a 4-day work week (or even less by some skeptics) – we can either fight them and try to keep the profession as it is or accept that change is inevitable and embrace it as it comes.
Maybe the lawyers of tomorrow won't be like the lawyers of today.
Most importantly – they probably won't have to.
Summary of input from our interns:
Advantages and Benefits:
Interns unanimously acknowledge AI's utility in streamlining academic tasks. AI tools assist with legal research by quickly identifying useful sources, summarizing lengthy documents, and clarifying complex concepts. This efficiency allows students to focus more on critical thinking and less on mundane tasks. Additionally, AI improves writing quality by offering grammar, style, and coherence suggestions, which is especially beneficial for non-native English speakers. Personalized learning plans and adaptive learning tools help students address knowledge gaps, deepening their understanding of intricate legal topics. Immediate feedback from AI is also highly valued, as it corrects mistakes on the spot, unlike traditional tutor feedback, which can take weeks.
Challenges and Concerns:
Despite these benefits, the interns expressed concerns about the potential downsides of AI in education. A prominent worry is the risk of over-reliance on AI, which could impede genuine learning and critical thinking. Some interns feel that extensive use of AI might lead to mechanical studying habits, diminishing deep comprehension and making students more likely to accept AI-generated content without sufficient scrutiny. Issues of academic integrity, particularly plagiarism, are also of concern. AI's tendency to generate incorrect or incomplete information necessitates rigorous fact-checking, adding an extra layer of responsibility for students.
Ethical and Educational Implications:
The feedback suggests a cautious approach to integrating AI into legal education. While some professors advocate for exploring AI tools, others remain wary of misuse and ethical violations. Interns propose that structured guidance on using AI ethically and effectively could help mitigate these risks. Courses specifically designed to teach proper AI use in legal studies could strike a balance between leveraging AI's benefits and preserving traditional learning methods. Ensuring AI complements rather than replaces traditional methods is crucial for developing a well-rounded skill set in students.
Overall Perspective:
The general consensus among interns is that AI holds significant potential to enhance legal education by making it more efficient and personalized. However, they stress the importance of balancing AI use with traditional learning approaches. Critical thinking, ethical considerations, and independent skill development should remain at the forefront of educational practices. As AI technology continues to evolve, staying informed and adapting to new tools will be essential for maximising its benefits while minimising its drawbacks.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.